"Solaris being canned, at least 50% of teams to be RIF'd in short term. Hardware teams being told to cease development. There will be no Solaris 12, final release will be 11.4. Orders coming straight from Larry."
https://www.thelayoff.com/t/KBEVoB1
The crazy people that said that Oracle bought Sun just to shut it down and use the patents to sue Google are looking pretty non-crazy now. I guess once the lawsuit was lost (and boy was it expensive) the shutdown was inevitable.
Of course, not funding SPARC development so that it could stay competitive with Intel didn't help much either.
Maybe it'll go back to being Solaris 10-ish, and open again. I always felt that Solaris 11 was a huge step in the wrong direction. Sure it brought lots of great new technologies, and overdue improvements. But, was done as a hugely steep learning curve for established Solaris admins to pick up. And, this after having to go up a the learning curve to get to embracing Solaris 10 (before everything before it became obsolete due to the times and policies....such as the new DST or demands for passwords longer than 8 characters.) Up until I had left, we hadn't changed the root password as often, since it was needed to work as 8 characters, while the corporate minimum was 10 and soon to be 12. But we still had production Solaris 8 servers to support.
Even though Solaris 10 had been out for years when I transitioned to a new job, we all had to get training in it before its adoption into production. And, it still took a few years to get proficient with it. It was a noticeable thing to go work on a system that had originally been setup early in our Solaris 10 adoption...though not as strange as having to go back and work on a Solaris 9 or 8 server (or container. The production instance was on hardware, but we were pushing everything to zones/containers with 10...so had turned its fail-over instance into a container to upgrade to 10, except the application had been statically built on 8 and wouldn't let us upgrade....and the version was the company's only experiment with having a Unix version in deciding where to go after NT4.) Yes, there were still systems on XP when I left...but they weren't connected to 'net. At least we had upgraded from our SAN that had embedded XP to one with embedded Vista...7 hadn't been out long for them to certify when they first shipped... Though Oracle had its hand it the death of SAN at job. We had purchased it from Sun/Oracle a month before Oracle ended its relationship with the hardware vendor. Oracle locked us into the 3 year support we had with them, but we couldn't get upgrades (expand beyond the initial 144TB, which we had original anticipated it doubling each year......instead of never. Or make it pale in comparison to near petabyte NAS arrays. But, there were other factors that had also contributed to the death of SAN. Even though there was planning for FC domains in upgrades to Nexus 7000s. Though the DC domains would be the last to get done. Though we got partially upgraded from our 2G connection to core to 20G ahead of schedule, due to demands for research grants requiring us to be at least 10G on I2...
We had all taken a couple of Solaris 11 courses, where we eventually decided that we would stay with 10 until we couldn't. In the end, we went Linux only in our virtualized DC... with Ubuntu as the only OS, unless it had to run Oracle. (and only one pair of servers would be allowed to run those VMs...the pairs being separated by a ~2 hour drive.)
Once Solaris is dead, will anything from Oracle ZFS makes its way into OpenZFS?
Also the Virtualized DC backed by Isolon storage also ordered the death of our FreeBSD servers. (which had finally gotten pushed into production status, when an SLA customer replaced their aging Solaris 10 hardware with it...because they really liked ZFS and zones, but didn't want to pay the Oracle tax.)
Though not sure if I should stick with FreeBSD at home, as my 9.3 servers approach EOL. Though I'd prefer to stick with something ZFS....
TL;DR?
LK